linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] EFI: Add support for variables longer than 1024 bytes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGTjWtD33=EdOdMCy_TgX=fG0ZiUZTFTOP=Eyv3d7F-46u2pGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:06:27 -0800
From:	Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] EFI: Add support for variables longer than 1024 bytes

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:00 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 12/14/2011 02:57 PM, Mike Waychison wrote:
>>
>> Well,l we could *not* support returning all the data field for
>> datasize > 1024, and simply truncate the field.  We are limited by
>> PAGE_SIZE by sysfs here anyway (so we don't really want to have a
>> variable size memcpy in efivar_show_raw).
>>
>
> That may be the biggest reason to avoid sysfs.  As far as I know sysfs
> doesn't allow seq_file to be used.
>

Completely agreed.  I don't think a seq_file is warranted in this case
in particular, but the dummification of the interfaces in sysfs sure
makes it hard to do anything that isn't a "single value string".
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/